About your Search

20121112
20121120
STATION
MSNBC 4
MSNBCW 4
CNN 1
CNNW 1
CSPAN2 1
LANGUAGE
English 16
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)
boehner, who have already openly said, no increases in tax rates? >> well, you have to splinter off some republicans, in the senate it will be easier because you just have to get to 60. you might pass the december 31st deadline where you have a few more democrats in the senate. but the problem is always going to be the house. i think there may be a bargain in the -- in the side of coming to republicans and saying, here are cuts. but the price of those cuts will be that 2%. republicans will face a very tough choice in just a very short time. are they the ones that are going to be responsible for giving 98% of americans tax hikes? do the republicans want to be known as the party that raised your taxes for everybody but 2%? >> right. and i think, martin -- >> so, the 2% solution may be a noose around the republicans' neck. >> i think the republicans have little leverage. not just for that reason but a couple of other reasons. if you consider the fact that taxes are at 15% of gdp, spending is at 24%, even the paul ryan budget proposes we only reduce spending to 20% of gdp. that means five pe
a single question, what are you willing to give. you know, when john boehner appears, they say are you willing to accept higher rates. no one says what are you going to do about entitlements or anything, there's no question of the president whether he will compromise and what that would look like. >> paul: steve, what do you think the republicans ought to do here? is there a way out for them or are they going to be pushed back into a corner where they have no choice, but to concede that they have to raise tax rates or else go over the cliff and get blamed for that? >> well, it's a tough situation for them. there's no question about it because as you know, the default position, if we don't do anything is for the taxes to go up on everybody on january 1st, and that's something i think both sides want to avoid. it's very interesting, the thing that happened this week to start the week, was who was the first person that barack obama met with in the white house since his election, the labor unions, the labor block, that tells a lot who is driving policy at least at the start of the second t
. they weren't fighting for the top jobs. that's going to stay john boehner. they're actually fighting for the number four job in the house. the contest was tom price against one of the precious few republican women in the house, cathy mcmorris rodgers. and there were some interesting politics at work here. miss mcmorris rodgers had the support of speaker john boehner, but tom price had the support of this guy, the republican party's vice presidential nominee, paul ryan. in the end, it was cathy mcmorris rodgers who won. paul ryan's guy lost. and so even as they lose the presidency, thanks to a devastating gender gap in the polls, and at the same time they send even fewer republican women to congress than were there before, republicans did today pick for this small, low-profile national republican number four leadership role an actual woman. and that's the best they've ever done. that's the highest ranking gop woman there has ever been in the house. back over on the senate side, republicans are faced with a dilemma set up for them by john mccain, as i was just discussing with bill burt
. john boehner still in the house for the time being at the treasury. the president is back in the white house and harry reid is in the senate with a few more seats. why should i believe this would end any more positively than the summer of 2011? >> because again i'm not going to try to talk to you in optimism but let's look at what's changed. you have republican leadership acknowledging for the first time in this debate in public that it's agreed to increase in revenues as part of an agreement that helps restore fiscal balance. that's a very important change. you can debate on what motivated that change, and of course it's true that approach has been a popular very substantial support among the american people. you have a much greater recognition that the economy would benefit on a carefully designed balanced agreement on fiscal reform and putting it off indefinitely is not good for the country. that's important, too. and i also think again if you listen carefully to what people are saying and what many politicians are saying with many elected representatives are saying there's a lot of
at this point is likely no because even the top republican in congress, house speaker john boehner yesterday threw cold water on it saying he doesn't think it's necessary and the top democrat in the senate says the same thing, and others, as well. i have to tell you something that just happened on capitol hill, and that is our senate producer ted barrett just ran into john mccain and asked about something that we're hearing from democrats, which is john mccain is calling for more information to congress, but he had a press conference yesterday instead of going to a closed briefing where administration officials were giving more information. well, ted barrett asked john mccain about that, and it was apparently an intense very angry exchange and mccain simply would not comment on it at all. >> so this is just getting uglier and uglier, at least more passionate, shall we say, dana bash. >> absolutely. >> thanks so much. >>> the gop republicans struggling with its party identity after losing the presidential election last tuesday and it's not just pundits trying to figure out why the republicans
is listening to their suggestions. up to this point house speaker john boehner is saying he will not accept any increases on tax rates. but some top republicans are quietly coming around. it is obvious after the election that republicans do not hold the mandate on taxes. while the g.o.p. still might not agree to a tax rate on those making more than $250,000 a year, if democrats demand a millionaire tax increase, it will be hard for republicans to say no. climate change actvilles are not feeling too optimistic after the president's news conference yesterday. advocates had been hoping the president would push for a carbon tax as a way to help raise revenue during talks on the fiscal cliff. while the president did say he is a official believe err -- firm believer in climate change and will take up the issue in the future. for now it will take a backseat to the economy. this is also an issue both parties avoided during the presidential campaign and even during energy talks, there was no mention of climate change
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)